This chapter takes the history of literary history beyond the confines of the classical period, and past the formal parameters of prose. Its focus is Philostratus’ depiction of the Second Sophistic, one of most instrumental and contentious ancient models of epoch-making. The Second Sophistic is conventionally considered a world of prose. I make the case for the central role of poetry in Philostratus’ conception of its literary identity. After some preliminary remarks on the complex construct of the Second Sophistic as a cultural phenomenon, and the undoubtable but controversial role of Philostratus at the centre of it, I offer a close reading of the multiple moments of poetry within the Vitae Sophistarum, which shed new light on Philostratus’ approach to the textuality and temporality of this milieu. The chapter ends by discussing the Heroicus, which contains Philostratus’ most elaborate verse compositions, and sees the voices of ancient poets resurrected into new sophistic poetry. This close encounter with Philostratean verse reveals an active and experimental approach to the poetic tradition which treats canonical verse texts as both bounded and closed, and inherently unfinished, and where the lines between old and new, verse and prose, exegesis and literature are interrogated and undermined.

This chapter considers the nature and development of Greek literary history before Aristotle, a generally acknowledged watershed. It covers all sorts of reflections on the literary past and studies the assumptions and paradigms at work in our earliest sources. While highlighting the continuity of tropes and stock narratives, it also seeks to understand the development of literary history in relation to the technology of writing and in relation to an emergent ideology of classicism, which literary historical thinking both reacted to and further strengthened. The first section briefly surveys immanent literary history in poetry from Homer to Aristophanes, typologising tropes which would endure through the ages and suggesting a skeletal metahistory of early literary history. The second and third sections then move forward in time and shift from poetry to prose in order to consider in greater detail two specific work. Glaucus of Rhegium’s On the Archaic Poets and Musicians and the Mouseion of the sophist Alcidamas, early instantiations of, respectively, a macroscopic narrative of progress and a literary biography, prefigure many core characteristics of later ancient literary history. A conclusion returns to the bigger picture to consider the distinctive value of studying ancient literary history on its own terms.

The opening lines of Ajax are spoken by the goddess Athena, who addresses her favourite, Odysseus, as an adherent of Harm Enemies: he is tracking down an enemy as usual, in a manner worthy of his traditionally tricky persona. She is the dearest of gods to him, and they enjoy a solidarity inherited from the Odyssey. He places himself in her hands, as he has always done in the past. But despite the bond between them, a conflict of values emerges. When Odysseus is reluctant to view the mad Ajax Athena scolds him as a coward. She implies that any kind of fear or ’reluctance’ constitutes cowardice.

Appreciations of Nietzsche as a so-called poet-philosopher reveal little about Nietzsche’s thinking about the poets and they pay insufficient attention to his conception of philosophy. This chapter offers a corrective by examining how he figures the task of the poets in his middle writings. The focus is on what he has to say about the poets in relation to the passions, as this provides the best way of approaching the problem. His criticisms of the poets – that they are fundamentally melancholic and that they too readily give vent to naturalizing impulses – is best seen in the context of his upholding philosophy’s classical concern with and teaching of the mastery of the passions. The concern with self-cultivation informs Nietzsche’s conception of philosophy at a deep level, and it also drives his reflections on the poets. Poets are significant because they assume the task of providing signposts to the future by developing images of what he calls “beautiful human beings.” I attend to Nietzsche’s interest in Adalbert Stifter’s novel Indian Summer in the final section of the chapter, since it is from Stifter that Nietzsche may have derived, at least in part, his conception of the cultivation of beautiful human beings.

This chapter reviews the main claims of the book concerning formularity, meter, and dialect, as well as a theory of Homeric creativity, and outlines some possible future research directions.

This chapter covers the general features of the Homeric hexameter and the most famous debates therein, before asking the more general question as to what was the usefulness of meter for oral-traditional poets. Section 1 introduces the metrical scheme of the hexameter (including incisions and bridges), the principles of scansion and syllabification. Section 2 explores the colometry of the hexameter, and introduces the prosodic hierarchy. It also employs intonational data to argue tha the Homeric hexameter coincided with an intonational phrase, and its cola mostly with phonological phrases, and provides a new prosodic account of enjambement in Homer. Section 3 covers previous attempt at establishing the historical origin of the hexameter, arguing that the account of Kiparsky 2018 is the most promising. Section 4 looks at the speech of professional sportscasters, and argues that it shows several types of prosodic regularization that is akin to a basic type of meter. Extensive prosodic regularization diminishes the options available to a speaker, making it easier to sustain high levels of fluency. Meter arguably fulfilled a similar task in oral-traditional composition in performance.

Formularity, or the poet’s reliance on prefabricated linguistic features in the composition of his verses, has been the most debated feature of Oral-Formulaic Theory. This chapter reviews the history of Homeric formularity (Part 1), while introducing new key insights from the fields of linguistics (esp. usage-based linguistics, corpus linguistics, and language acquisition studies) and the cognitive sciences (Parts 2-5). Parts 2-3 argue that formularity is a general feature of human language and cognition. Homer’s formularity is quantitatively notable, however, in that it involves sequences that are particularly long when compared to repeated sequences in corpora of both contemporary written or spoken English and ancient prose and hexameter authors. This is interpreted as a sign of Homer’s extreme mastery of his medium, which was arguably necessitated by the oral-improvisational nature of the task. Part 4 develops a new theory of Homeric formularity, borrowing insights from connectionism, lexical priming, and construction grammar, and introduces fine-grained distinctions between conceptual associations, collocations, constructions, metrical constructions and structural formulas.

This extract from the Homeric Catalogue of Ships in Iliad book 2 (specifically the Achaean section) stands as a prologue to the collection of texts, reminding us that much ancient Greek geographical writing is a response to Homer, whom authors tended to exalt as the originator of geography. The passage enumerates, with obvious omissions, the allies from Greece and the Aegean who took part in the siege of Troy, arranged in regional ethnic groups, each with its own leader, and names a variety of settlements within each region (or island), the majority of which still existed in the subsequent historical periods. It illustrates the early use of regional identifiers within mainland Greece (and some of the islands), putting down a marker about the longevity of these culture regions throughout the whole ancient history of Greece.

This chaper looks at the peculiar mixture of linguistic forms that are archaic and dialectal in Homer and compares them to the hybrid dialects that are employed in English-language popular music today. Sections 1 and 2 provide a detailed account of the main linguistic features of Homer’s Kunstsprache and separates its archaic components from its dialectal components. Section 3 looks at perceptions of dialect (and dialect imitations) in Archaic Greece. Sections 4-5 illustrate how ancient and modern critics interpreted Homer’s dialect, and introduces phase theory, along with remaining open questions therein. Section 6 introduces several contemporary case studies of singers adopting a non-native, hybrid dialect of English when performing. These include Adele, Bob Dylan, the Beatles, Green Day, Alesha Dixon, the Arctic Monkeys, Iggy Azalea, and Keith Urban. Lessons won from these case studies are then applied to Homer.

This chapter develops a theory of Homeric creativity that is informed by both contemporary cognitive studies and by ancient ideas about poetic craft and divine inspiration, as seen through the lenses of archaic poetry and Plato’s Ion. Sections 1-2 survey the conceptions of the poet as a craftsman vs. divinely inspired in Homer, Hesiod, Archilochus, Pindar, Democritus, and Plato. Section 3 introduces the modern study of creativity in the field of cognitive psychology, the study of jazz improvisation, and the concept of flow. Section 4 introduces the neuroscience of improvisation, including recent fMRI studies on jazz and lyric improvisation. The results of these studies (pointing to a state of hypofrontality when carrying out complex improvisational tasks) are compatible with some ancient ideas on creativity and inspiration (such as the idea that an external source - like the Muses- might be involved in these creative acts).

Homer’s technique of oral composition is highly traditional and tightly regulated, to the point that it presents us with a paradox: how can Homer be regarded as such a great poet, when so much of what he did was not original, but mechanical? While past critics have argued that Homer achieved greatness despite the mechanicity of his technique (and thus trascended it), this book explores the hypothesis that the mechanicity of the technique (and particularly the formal features of formularity, meter, and dialect) should be seen as adaptive features that enabled Homer’s greatness.

Building on the concept of enargeia, Chapter 4 examines the cinematism of epic ecphrases: passages containing detailed descriptions of remarkable objects. To the ancients, Homer’s vividness of presentation put him in the forefront of painters, while film directors, chiefly Eisenstein, have repeatedly referred to him as a precursor. In particular, the stories told on the shield of Achilles in the Iliad validate Eisenstein’s concept. Eisenstein wrote extensively about Lessing’s thesis, advanced in his influential Laocoön, about the limits of painting and poetry; both authors’ approaches are evaluated here, with Eisenstein’s argument proven the stronger one. The story of Theseus and Ariadne depicted on the coverlet in Catullus’ poem 64, the most complex ecphrasis in classical literature, is then treated as the basis of a film adaptation, which reveals the astonishing sophistication that can be discovered from the perspective of cinematism. Shorter observations about Virgil and, in passing, Juvenal round out this chapter.

In this chapter we find that Homer’s extraordinary vividness (cf. Chapter 4) is completely missing in a crucial scene of the Odyssey: Odysseus’ shot through twelve axes — through, not across, in-between, or anything else. Scholars have proposed several solutions to a textual problem that still resists any conclusive explanation. Screenwriters and film directors, too, have tackled it. The chapter first outlines the problem in the text and examines the major theories that commentators and translators have advanced to solve it, then analyzes all screen versions from the silent era until the age of computer videos. None other than T. E. Lawrence (“Lawrence of Arabia”), himself a translator of the Odyssey, concluded that “a cinema” (i.e. a film) is required to understand Homer’s scene. Several onscreen arrangements of the axes and the manner of Odysseus’ shot are surprisingly close to scholars’ theories.

From Homer’s Iliad to the Athenian funeral oration and beyond, the ‘beautiful death’ was the name that the Greeks used to describe a combatant’s death. From the world of Achilles to democratic Athens, the warrior’s death was a model that concentrated the representations and the values that served as masculine norms. This should not be a surprise: the Iliad depicts a society at war and, in the Achaean camp at least, a society of men, without children and legitimate wives. Certainly, the Athenian city-state distinguished itself from others by the splendour that it gave the public funeral of its citizens that had died in war and especially by the repatriating of their mortal remains. In a society that believed in autochthony, this repatriation was, undoubtedly, significant. Since the beautiful death crystallised the courage of Achilles and Athenians alike, it was, from the outset, linked to speech. Indeed, heroic death and the civic beautiful death were the subject matter of elaborate speech.

This chapter reviews the fragmentary evidence for the five first historians and histories of Alexander: Callisthenes of Olynthus, Chares of Mytilene, Nearchus of Crete, Onesicritus of Astypalea and the royal diaries of the king, perhaps compiled by Eumenes of Cardia. These Greek authors took part of the Asiatic expedition and enjoyed a unique vantage point from which to report on the central events of the campaign. Nevertheless, they often resort to literary convention or even invention along the lines of other great Greek literature, especially Homer and Herodotus. Moreover, they all purport to have had some kind of personal access to the king, and the evidence suggests that they sought to magnify that link in various ways during Alexander’s lifetime and after his death. The chapter is structured around a biographical sketch of each author or, in the case of the Royal Journal, text, and a guide to the content, form and function of each history is supplied.

This chapter focuses on the figure of the Cyclops and the use of ‘the animal’ in thinking human difference. It presents the animalizing of certain humans (the attribution of animal features to them) as a potent strategy to dehumanize and thus marginalize certain ways of being human. In the ethnographic imagination of Homer’s Odyssey, the margins of the known world are shown to coincide with the margins of the human. The chapter further illustrates that this spatial concept of the human did not remain restricted to the ancient world but carries on into the modern: The figure of the Cyclops, whose problematic humanity is in sharp contrast to the enlightened, educated, and cunning Odysseus, in many ways anticipates that of ‘the savage’ as the quintessential ‘other’ in the modern Western ethnographic literature. And yet the question arises as to whether the ancient story does not already expose the kind of hubris at play when we normalize certain ways of being human while dismissing others.